Ackerman calls out the WSJ:
[H]ow is this a “limited” troop increase? The Journal says that the troop increase will total around 30,000. The Washington Post’s headline says 34,000. If either figure is correct, that means Obama will order tonight a greater troop increase into Afghanistan than President Bush ordered into Iraq in 2007 for the iconic troop surge. What’s more, there are about 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan today, versus about 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq in January 2007, so relative to the existing base total of troops, this Afghanistan troop increase is way bigger than the Iraq one. Agree with it or disagree with it, there’s nothing “limited” about it.
The degenerate right has to find a way to attack Obama even if he is doing what they support. That's why I assume and hope that Obama is not fool enough to believe that the GOP will ever ever back a Democratic war president - even if he does everything they want. Their partisanship is total, as Cheney demonstrates. Cheney, the de facto GOP leader on the war, could even interpret the biggest proportional surge in either Iraq or Afghanistan as "weakness". It may be madness; but it's a funny form of weakness.